I am Forbes' Opinion Editor. I am a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research, and the author of How Medicaid Fails the Poor (Encounter, 2013). In 2012, I served as a health care policy advisor to Mitt Romney. To contact me, click here. To receive a weekly e-mail digest of articles from The Apothecary, sign up here, or you can subscribe to The Apothecary’s RSS feed or my Twitter feed. In addition to my Forbes blog, I write on health care, fiscal matters, finance, and other policy issues for National Review. My work has also appeared in National Affairs, USA Today, The Atlantic, and other publications. I've appeared on television, including on MSNBC, CNBC, HBO, Fox News, and Fox Business. For an archive of my writing prior to February 2011, please visit avikroy.net. Professionally, I'm the founder of Roy Healthcare Research, an investment and policy research firm. In this role, I serve as a paid advisor to health care investors and industry stakeholders. Previously, I worked as an analyst and portfolio manager at J.P. Morgan, Bain Capital, and other firms.

A “national moment of truth.” That’s how President Obama’s fiscal reform commission characterized the state of the nation’s finances over one year ago. Last year, the President kicked the commission’s bipartisan proposals into the gutter, put out a budget drenched in red ink, and was greeted with such outrage that he quickly gave speech that many dubbed a budget “do-over.”

So much for a teachable moment.

President Obama’s fiscal year 2013 budget proposal came out this month, and again underwhelmed. Obama has consistently given lip service to the need for economic growth, sustainable federal finances, and smart, more efficient, government spending. Yet again, however, his budget fails to reflect these noble sentiments. He pegs the 2012 deficit at $1.3 trillion; projects the 2013 red ink at $901 billion; and commits to a sea of federal debt in the next decade that follows makes a mockery of this new talking point about “living within our means.”

Last year, Obama’s failure to lead on fiscal issues resulted in the debt ceiling political wrangle, a downgrade from Standard and Poor’s, and the Super Committee fiasco. His current budget proposal doubles down on the vacuum of leadership on tax reform, social security reform, and – especially – reform of federal health programs.

A key component of any strategy for better growth and fiscal sustainability is reforming Medicaid and Medicare to be secure for the next generations. Medicare and Medicaid together make up 23 percent of federal spending, a number that is only going up. So, why is President Obama largely staying with the status quo in this year’s budget proposal? Medicare is fundamentally broken, as is reflected by the $280 billion gap between outlays and receipts of payroll taxes and premiums. It is not possible to simply trim away at the edges. Real savings can only come from real reform.

The Medicare reforms included in President Obama’s budget are too minor and often misguided. Take, for example, home health expenses. It is widely recognized that home health genuinely suffers from bad-apple providers and other issues of program integrity that have nothing to do with beneficiaries. How does the Administration plan to deal with this? A beneficiary co-pay that will likely have the unintended consequence of driving seniors away from home health and into more expensive care settings – and do nothing to trim out the fat.

Obama also does even more to empower the Independent Payment Advisory Board, a controversial body created in the Affordable Care Act that will inevitably act as a brake on American medical innovation. In its efforts to contain Medicare costs, the IPAB will be forced to slash provider reimbursements, with the juiciest targets being the newest, most innovative and most expensive therapies.

The President takes a pass on solving the Sustainable Growth Rate’s impending cuts for physician payments, asserting that the cuts will be averted, but providing no solutions for how to reach that end.

The President’s Medicaid reforms include lowering the threshold for providers subject to Medicaid taxes, and paying states a single blended matching rate for Medicaid and its cousin, the State Children’s Health Insurance Program.

In each and every case, President Obama does not pursue deep reforms, relies on minor budgetary Band-Aids, and gets the policy wrong.

It is time for real reform to control health care costs. It is time for real entitlement reform. President Obama provides neither; instead, he commits the country to live beyond its means for another decade.

Post Your Comment

Post Your Reply

Forbes writers have the ability to call out member comments they find particularly interesting. Called-out comments are highlighted across the Forbes network. You'll be notified if your comment is called out.

Comments

Just when the Baby Boomers from WWII “Greatest Generation” are reaching their retirement age and ALSO the age of higher medical attention during the WORST economy since the Great Depression, the “Rational” voice of reason (e.g. Republican 1%er IDEOLOGUE) insists on fiscal responsibility and THEIR version of REFORM.

…Well I got news for you and your penny pinching Wall Street buddies, UNLESS you want a Million Man March of Grey Hairs, Viet Nam Vets and out of work Americans just short of their 401k, greeting Congressman on the steps of the Capitol, someone will read the memo that elderly, sick and retired people VOTE!

NOT for ideology…. for SOLUTIONS that work for, NOT punish, Americans.

If you want it PAID for…. RAISE THE TAXES ON THOSE WHO HAVEN’T BEEN PAYING THEIR SHARE! The line forms on the RIGHT…

What an idiot. You have fallen for the Liberal rhetoric. The problem is not less taxation, but too much spending. The solution is to cut spneding and reduce the size and scope of government. Then begin making refoms to the future Social Security and Medicare benificiaries. Taking the cap off the amount paid by employees would allow the upper income folks to pay more. Having a litmus test to show who really needed Social Security benefits at retirement would also help. Raising the retirement age to 70, and the early retirement age to 68 would salvage a system that has grown too large too fast, with not enough compensation. Also, allowing those to participate who didn’t contribute, or who under contributed must be curtailed. The Old Adage of Democrats being Tax and Spend has been taken to the next level. Wake upo America before you wake up too late and discover Greece.

What an idiot. You have fallen for the Liberal rhetoric. The problem is not less taxation, but too much spending. The solution is to cut spneding and reduce the size and scope of government. Then begin making refoms to the future Social Security and Medicare beneficiaries. Taking the cap off the amount paid by employees would allow the upper income folks to pay more. Having a litmus test to show who really needed Social Security benefits at retirement would also help. Raising the retirement age to 70, and the early retirement age to 68 would salvage a system that has grown too large too fast, with not enough contributions to sustain the recipients. Also, allowing those to participate who didn’t contribute, or who under contributed must be curtailed. The Old Adage of Democrats being Tax and Spend has been taken to the next level. Wake upo America before you wake up too late and discover Greece.